Breathtaking absurdities can be deduced from Einstein's 1905 false light postulate - here is one of them:

http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdfThibault Damour: "The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards the future) is possible. As a gedanken experiment (if we neglect practicalities such as the technology needed for reaching velocities comparable to the velocity of light, the cost of the fuel and the capacity of the traveller to sustain high accelerations), it shows that a sentient being can jump, "within a minute" (of his experienced time) arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, and see, and be part of, what (will) happen then on Earth. This is a clear way of realizing that the future "already exists" (as we can experience it "in a minute")."

The future-already-exists absurdity, in its generalized form, is known as the Block Universe - something that, for unknown reasons, Einsteinians vigorously fight:

http://prce.hu/centre_for_time/jtf/passage.html"Philosophers: David Albert, Christophe Bouton, David Braddon-Mitchell, Jeremy Butterfield, Christoph Hoerl, *Luciano Floridi, Rick Grush, Nick Huggett, Kristie Miller, Wayne Myrvold, Huw Price, Dean Rickles, Don Ross, Jos Uffink. Physicists: Edward Anderson, Fay Dowker, Avshalom Elitzur, George Ellis, Daniele Oriti, Carlo Rovelli, Rafael Sorkin. (...) Twentieth century physics is often thought to have established that there is no distinction between past, present and future, no flow of time, and no fundamental direction of time. This viewpoint - the Block Universe, as it is sometimes called ? is reflected in remarks such as the following: 'We physicists know that the distinction between past, present and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.' (Einstein) (...) However, the Block Universe view is under challenge from within physics, from theorists such as George Ellis, Lee Smolin and Chris Fuchs, who believe that in leaving out these elements, physics is missing something essential."

http://www.fqxi.org/community/articles/display/148"Many physicists argue that time is an illusion. Lee Smolin begs to differ. (...) Smolin wishes to hold on to the reality of time. But to do so, he must overcome a major hurdle: General and special relativity seem to imply the opposite. In the classical Newtonian view, physics operated according to the ticking of an invisible universal clock. But Einstein threw out that master clock when, in his theory of special relativity, he argued that no two events are truly simultaneous unless they are causally related. If simultaneity - the notion of "now" - is relative, the universal clock must be a fiction, and time itself a proxy for the movement and change of objects in the universe. Time is literally written out of the equation. Although he has spent much of his career exploring the facets of a "timeless" universe, Smolin has become convinced that this is "deeply wrong," he says."

http://www.humanamente.eu/PDF/Issue13_Paper_Norton.pdfJohn Norton: "It is common to dismiss the passage of time as illusory since its passage has not been captured within modern physical theories. I argue that this is a mistake. Other than the awkward fact that it does not appear in our physics, there is no indication that the passage of time is an illusion. (...) The passage of time is a real, objective fact that obtains in the world independently of us. How, you may wonder, could we think anything else? One possibility is that we might think that the passage of time is some sort of illusion, an artifact of the peculiar way that our brains interact with the world. Indeed that is just what you might think if you have spent a lot of time reading modern physics. Following from the work of Einstein, Minkowski and many more, physics has given a wonderfully powerful conception of space and time. Relativity theory, in its most perspicacious form, melds space and time together to form a four-dimensional spacetime. The study of motion in space and all other processes that unfold in them merely reduce to the study of an odd sort of geometry that prevails in spacetime. In many ways, time turns out to be just like space. In this spacetime geometry, there are differences between space and time. But a difference that somehow captures the passage of time is not to be found. There is no passage of time."